+1 for singing telegram Russell Jurney http://datasyndrome.com
On Apr 19, 2013, at 12:30 AM, Bill Graham <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Gerrit, > > Sorry to hear these changes caused you problems. The PPNL interface is > marked as Evolving, so it should be expected that future releases of that > interface will change (i.e. break). I'm open for ways to better communicate > these changes when they occur besides the current release notes process. > > thanks, > Bill > > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Dmitriy Ryaboy <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Gerrit, we do try to keep backwards incompatible changes to a minimum, >> but sometimes they are needed to make progress. How about we make a >> practice of tagging notifications about new pig release candidates with >> [RC] so you can set up your filters and get a heads up to try your software >> with the latest release candidate? That will at least let you prepare for >> changes before a release is made, or perhaps argue that we should revert >> something that is backwards incompatible. >> >> On Apr 18, 2013, at 2:23 AM, Gerrit Jansen van Vuuren <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'm the developer of http://gerritjvv.github.io/glue/ that uses the Pig >> API >>> directly to launch pig jobs in separate JVM instances. >>> >>> Recently I've updated to use pig-0.11.1 and found two API compatibility >>> breaks. >>> >>> PigServer.parseExecType does not exist anymore, (was a static method up >> to >>> pig-0.10.1) >>> >>> New method for PigProgressNotificationListener >>> >>> public void initialPlanNotification(String scriptId, MROperPlan plan) >>> >>> It would be nice if you guys (when possible) could lookout for these kind >>> of breaks in the future. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Gerrit > > > > -- > *Note that I'm no longer using my Yahoo! email address. Please email me at > [email protected] going forward.*
